The courts are all over the place on DV, but many courts have held that the name of the OC and the amount owed are not adequate validation. I'm inclined to agree, in issuing my non-legal opinion. I mean, heck, in the initial notice the CA sends you they have to give you that, and more.
15 USC 1692g(a)
(a) Notice of debt; contents
Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing -
(1) the amount of the debt;
(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;
(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and
(5) a statement that, upon the consumer's written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
If they didn't give you the info in 1692g(a) in their initial communication, then they are already in violation.
Message Edited by Noah_Bodie on
08-16-2007 10:58 PM